The headlines are alarming. Reports detail patients being harmed, misled, or outright failed by popular AI apps. Stories like these are emotionally charged, and my preliminary assessment of the seven high-profile cases recently documented by Information Age is that at least some may have genuine merit.
It’s easy to read about a chatbot giving harmful advice and immediately conclude
Multiple reputable sources are reporting that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman recently told employees—via a leaked internal memo—that Google’s newest advances in AI could “create some temporary economic headwinds” for OpenAI, even as he tried to reassure staff that the company is “catching up fast” and remains well-positioned for the long run.
Altman’s message reportedly acknowledged that
The relentless, frenetic excitement surrounding Artificial Intelligence feels familiar. For anyone who remembers the turn of the millennium, it’s a clear echo of the dot-com bubble, a time of speculation about a new technology completely detached from business fundamentals.
Back then, optimism for an internet-driven economy sent stock prices for companies like AOL to astronomical
We’re all busy, right? I get it. It’s all about knowing what to prioritize.
If you want (or need) thoughtful analysis of AI developments, MIT Sloan Management Review is one of the best places to invest a little time. A case in point: their October 7 article titled, “Cut Through GenAI Confusion: Eight Definitive Reads.”
ABA Formal Opinion 512 provides welcome guidance on ethical obligations for lawyers, demanding competence in understanding AI’s benefits and risks (Model Rule 1.1), diligence in protecting client confidentiality (Model Rule 1.6), clarity in client communications (Model Rule 1.4), candor toward tribunals (Model Rule 3.3), effective supervision of AI use (Model Rules 5.1, 5.3), and reasonableness
Anna Guo reports on a study comparing the performance of lawyers and AI apps. Key takeaways:
1. Several AI tools matched, and in some cases outperformed, lawyers in producing reliable first drafts.
2. The top AI (Gemini 2.5 Pro) marginally outperformed the top individual human lawyer: 73.3% vs. 70% reliability rate.
3. Specialized legal
There’s a significant debate on how soon computers may achieve artificial general intelligence. The AlphaZero Project–which led one of its leaders to receive the Nobel Prize for Chemistry–is an important data point in the discussion. Here’s the intro to my article at LLRX.com.
Will computers ever achieve the holy grail of artificial general intelligence
My review of the new book, The AI Con: How to Fight Big Tech’s Hype and Create the Future We Want (Harper 2025), by Emily M. Bender and Alex Hanna, is available at LLRX.com.
It’s the first negative book review I have written since I began writing reviews for The Federal Lawyer back in 1995. My
AI in the legal world is not a sentient being. It doesn’t argue cases, it doesn’t replace lawyers, and it certainly doesn’t understand the law in the way the best lawyers can.
What it can do is process large amounts of text quickly and find patterns in ways that mimic certain kinds of legal work—especially the repetitive
From my review of How to Think About AI: A Guide for the Perplexed at Attorney At Work:
With over 500 generative AI apps for lawyers cataloged by LegalTech Hub in March 2025, the proliferation of such tools shows no signs of slowing. In this environment, nuanced understanding is more critical than simply another